Abstract
IN your impression of October 6 Mr. Murphy adds another to the frequent attempts that are still made to galvanise the expiring hypothesis that attributes the solar heat and light to a meteoric bombardment. Many very strong and sufficient objections have been already brought against it, but as Mr. Murphy states that he is “not mathematician enough to form any opinion on the merits of the controversy,” I will add two arguments which to my mind are quite sufficient to annihilate this explanation—both of which may be sufficiently understood without mathematics, and neither of which have I ever seen fairly stated.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
WILLIAMS, W. The Fuel of the Sun. Nature 3, 26–27 (1870). https://doi.org/10.1038/003026a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/003026a0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.